Ebook: Expanding Perspectives on Open Science: Communities, Cultures and Diversity in Concepts and Practices

The term “electronic publishing” sounds a bit quaint today. But 21 years ago when the ELPUB conference series first started, the term promised all manner of potential that the Web and network technologies could bring to scholarly communication, scientific research and technical innovation. Indeed, over the last two decades we have seen tremendous developments across all these domains, and at the same time our social, economical and political lives have been completely transformed.

Open Science represents one such transformation, and not surprisingly, the elements that make Open Science possible, including open access, open data, open software, and other domains of open have been regular topics presented and debated at previous ELPUB conferences.

However, development and diffusion of open research practices are highly uneven across disciplines and across regions. And despite the common claims that Open Science improves transparency and accountability throughout the research life cycle while democratizing the knowledge production process, empirical research and conceptual validation of these ideas has been limited. In addition, there is a growing tendency to conceptualize Open Science as a set of conditions waiting to be met, without regard for regional differences, including cultural and historical contexts of knowledge production.

The theme of the conference this year, Expanding Perspectives on Open Science: Communities, Cultures and Diversity in Concepts and Practices, is intended to generate discussion and debate on the potential and limitations of openness. We thus invited, researchers and practitioners from diverse backgrounds to share their results and ideas at what we trust will be a highly interactive forum.

We also asked potential presenters to consider exploring alternative models of interaction and co-creation between scholars and citizen scientists, and the role of dissemination and publishing within these interactions. To stimulate submissions, we included these questions in the open call: Who determines the agenda and direction of emerging discourses around Open Science? How does Open Science challenge the current positions and power of players and agents in varying institutional contexts? Are we seeing a converging global view of Open Science, or are there disciplinary, regional, and other differences that are important to consider? What are the gaps between existing Open Science policies, regulatory frameworks, and implementation requirements and how should they be addressed? How do Open Science agendas relate to the Open Innovation agendas of governments, funders and institutions? What is the impact of these agendas on research funding and dissemination practices?

By assessing these interlinked questions, the aim is to improve our understanding of current challenges and opportunities in the ecosystem of open science, and how to move forward collaboratively in developing an inclusive system that works for a much broader range of participants.

All submissions were subjected to peer review, performed by members of the Program Committee. In all, a total of 27 research and practitioner papers and 7 posters are being presented at this year's conference, along with 4 workshops on the first day of the conference. The papers represent a broad range of topics related to Open Science, from provision of common infrastructure, innovative tools, new publishing models, sustainability models, and policy provisions. We also have a broad range of conceptual papers exploring the boundaries and diversities of open research practices in varying institutional and cultural contexts. Perhaps for the first time in ELPUB history, we have speakers coming from countries that span the globe. This was due in part to the fact that several of the presenters are members of the Open and Collaborative Science in Development Network (OCSDNet), and they are coming from countries including Senegal, Jamaica, Brazil, Peru, Colombia, and Argentina. At the conference, we hope to have a productive discussion about the challenges and opportunities facing researchers and citizens in the global South.

In keeping with the theme of the conference, this year we have three diverse keynote speakers with diverse expertise speaking on diverse topics, but all related to the implications of how networked technologies are changing the way we produce, consume, and circulate knowledge. Rachel Harding, an early career researcher in genomics at the University of Toronto, will speak on “Open science and accelerating discovery in rare and neglected diseases.” Dr. Hebe Vessuri, CIGA (Centro de Investigación en Geografía Ambiental) UNAM in Mexico, will speak on “Tapping knowledge globally: open access and mobile objects in an asymmetric world.” And Mimis Sophocleous, Academic Director of the Historical Archives and Research Centre of Limassol, will be asking “What happens to poetry and prose when they go in digital form online instead of reaching their readers in a book form.”

This year's conference takes place in Cyprus, the third largest island in the Mediterranean, after Sicily and Sardinia. At the crossroads of Europe, Asia, and Africa, its geographic location, rich, unique history and cultural diversity make it particularly well suited for hosting ELPUB 2017. We would like to thank the Library Director, Marios Zervas, of Cyprus University of Technology, and his Staff for their involvement regarding the sponsorships from publishers, the articles that will be presented on behalf of the CUT, and the promotional actions taken to advertise the ELPUB 2017 conference in the local community. We also thank the Publishers who readily and positively responded to the CUT Library's request for sponsorship and support. Last but not least, we thank Easy Conferences for their communication and collaboration with the CUT Library regarding the organization of the conference.

The staff at Easy Conference have been tremendously helpful and supportive. They were extremely prompt and attentive with our many requests. Not only did they assist with logistics and social event planning, they also provided valuable input regarding programing. We could not have managed this conference without their dedicated support.

We would like to express our sincere thanks to members of the ELPUB Executive Committee who, together with the Programme Committee, helped us to bring together a diverse and exciting programme. A special thanks to Saman Goudarzi, an undergraduate student at the University of Toronto at Scarborough, for her editorial assistance with the manuscripts. And thanks to Anne Marie de Rover and Paul Weij at the IOS Press for their support in the production of this proceedings.

We wish everyone a productive an inspiring conference. We would like to extend an invitation to all of you to the 22st edition of the conference, which will be held in Toronto, Canada. We hope to see an even more diverse group of presenters, topics, and attendees at this conference, and look forward to welcoming you to Toronto!

Leslie Chan and Fernando Loizides

June 6th, 2017

New medicines for many diseases, in particular neurodegenerative disorders, are not forthcoming, despite patient demands and billions of dollars spent on biomedical research globally. Traditional publishing methods in biomedical sciences are generally slow and disseminate manuscripts, sometimes without the inclusion of primary data, to a privileged audience affiliated to institutions which can afford publication subscription costs. To overcome this barrier to progressive scientific endeavors, many researchers are championing the use of preprints, transparent subject-relevant data repositories, open access journals and open lab notebooks in an effort to more effectively and efficiently communicate their research to a wider audience. In this talk I shall discuss these options and the decisions I have made as an early career researcher, to share my research output on Huntington's disease in real-time through an open lab notebook. Included will be a discussion of the motivations, methods and assessment of open online publishing, including an evaluation of my own open notebook endeavors.

This paper is the text of the keynote delivered at the ELPUB2017 conference.

The debate over the meaning, and value, of open movements has intensified. The fear of co-option of various efforts from Open Access to Open Data is driving a reassessment and re-definition of what is intended by “open”. In this article I apply group level models from cultural studies and economics to argue that the tension between exclusionary group formation and identity and aspirations towards inclusion and openness are a natural part of knowledge-making. Situating the traditional Western Scientific Knowledge System as a culture-made group, I argue that the institutional forms that support the group act as economic underwriters for the process by which groups creating exclusive knowledge invest in the process of making it more accessible, less exclusive, and more public-good-like, in exchange for receiving excludable goods that sustain the group. A necessary consequence of this is that our institutions will be conservative in their assessment of what knowledge-goods are worth of consideration and who is allowed within those institutional systems. Nonetheless the inclusion of new perspectives and increasing diversity underpins the production of general knowledge. I suggest that instead of positioning openness as new, and in opposition to traditional closed systems, it may be more productive to adopt a narrative in which efforts to increase inclusion are seen as a very old, core value of the academy, albeit one that is a constant work in progress.

What is open science and under what conditions could it contribute towards addressing persistent development challenges? How could we re-imagine and enrich open science so that it is inclusive of local realities and a diversity of knowledge traditions? These are some of the questions that the Open and Collaborative Science in Development Network (OCSDNet) is attempting to answer. In this paper, we provide the rationale and principles underlying OCSDnet, the conceptual and methodological frameworks guiding the research, and preliminary findings from the network's twelve globally diverse research projects. Instead of a “one-size-fits-all” approach to open science, our findings suggest that it is important to take into account the local dynamics and power structures that affect the ways in which individuals tend to collaborate (or not) within particular contexts. Despite the on-going resistance of powerful actors towards new forms of creating and sharing diverse knowledge, concluding evidence from the twelve research teams suggests that open science does indeed have an important role to play in facilitating inclusive collaboration and transformatory possibilities for development.

This study tries to systematically identify claims about societal benefits of Open Access by analyzing different documents written by Open Access supporters. Three types of documents are used: key declarations and statements in support of Open Access, Open Access policies issued by public funding agencies and journal editorials announcing the adoption of Open Access. Analysis shows these three types emphasize different benefits for Open Access as they address different audience. There is strong support of the idea that Open Access has benefits to different groups of people outside side the university/credentialed research institutes. It is not clear how much evidence is available to support these claims, but identifying them would suggest new stakeholders to involve in the conversation and perhaps also inform the ongoing debate about who should bear the cost of Open Access.

Today an increasing number of researchers and scientists follow Open Access. Open Access is a movement that offers researchers and the academic community the opportunity to share and access academic information freely and immediately. The Library and Information Services at the Cyprus University of Technology (CUT) has defined Open Access as one of its main strategies. An author fund has been established since 2013, with the financial support of a pharmaceutical company, in order to promote and support Open Access. Statistics of this Fund have shown that funding covers publications mainly in health sciences. These findings have allowed us to implement a new policy for the financing of Open Access publications from our university's budget, which falls within the framework of its social responsibility. However, considering the “hybrid model” and the “double dipping” which favors ‘big’ publishers, we will examine the different possibilities and present our reflections and decision for the new policy. Finally we will describe the policy implemented.

This paper will focus on the practices used by the OpenAIRE Cyprus National Open Access Desk as part of a pan-European network, for the implementation of the European Union's vision and policies for Open Science and Open Access to knowledge. Furthermore, the purpose of this paper is to present the scope, the role and the actions of the European Project OpenAIRE – Open Access Infrastructure for Research in Europe, which since 2009 is working towards the support of the European Commission's policies for Open Science. By definition “Open Science represents a new approach to the scientific process based on cooperative work and new ways of diffusing knowledge by using digital technologies and new collaborative tools. The idea captures a systemic change to the way science and research have been carried out for the last fifty years: shifting from the standard practices of publishing research results in scientific publications towards sharing and using all available knowledge at an earlier stage in the research process [1]”.

Peer review continues to play a central role in scholarly communication processes, however, over the last decade the concept has branched out in terms of methods, platforms and stakeholders involved. The paper demonstrates how alternative peer review tools and methods are instrumental in further shaping the communication of scholarly results towards Open Science. The analysis is based on the examination of various review methods (peer commentary, post-publication peer review, decoupled review, portable or cascading review) and review tools and services (publishing platforms, repository-based, and independent reviews). Besides the differences in operation and functionality, these new workflows and services combine common features of network-based solutions and collaborative research applications with varying degrees of openness (e.g. regarding participation, identities and/or reports). They, therefore, represent good examples of Open Science, in terms of transparency and networking among researchers.

My contribution aims to explain how a platform of electronic publishing such as OpenEdition might reach a larger public outside the academic sphere, and contribute to the revealing of research in the Humanities to civil society. Practices of academic blogging have expanded since the 2000's. Its potential as a vulgarization tool was acknowledged early. However, most initiatives in scientific blogging are concerned with the field of STM (Science, Technology, and Medicine). A quick overview of the classical literature about vulgarization shows that a great deal of attention is being paid to STM. As such, I propose to examine what the practices of communication are towards civil society in Humanities through Hypothèses, the blogging platform of OpenEdition.

Public policy and practice, and policy research, relies on diverse forms and types of information and communication, both traditional publications and a myriad of other documents and resources including reports, briefings, legislation, discussion papers, submissions and evaluations and much more. This is sometimes referred to as ‘grey literature’, a collective term for the wide range of publications produced and published directly by organisations, either in print or digitally, outside of the commercial or scholarly publishing industry. In the digital era grey literature has proliferated, and has become a key tool in influencing public debate and in providing an evidence-base for public policy and practice. Despite its ubiquity and influence, grey literature's role is often overlooked as a publishing phenomenon, ignored both in scholarly research on media and communications and in the debate on the changing nature of open access and academic publishing. This paper looks at the production of grey literature for public policy and practice where the changes enabled by computers and the internet are causing a hidden revolution in the dissemination of knowledge and evidence. It explores the production, dissemination and management of publications by organizations, their nature, purpose and value, and investigates the benefits and the challenges of publishing outside of the commercial or scholarly publishing enterprises. The paper provides estimates of the economic value of grey literature based on online surveys and valuations and considers the costs and benefits of self-publishing by organisations which provides both a dynamic, flexible and responsive publishing system and one in which link rot, duplication and highly varying standards abound. The findings are part of a broader research project looking at role and value of grey literature for policy and practice including consumption, production and collection. It will be of interest to a wide range of policy makers and practitioners as well as academics working in media and communications, public administration and library and information management.

This paper results to be the first, though absolutely initial, overview of commenting platforms and other web 2.0 resources which were born for and within the astrophysical research community, from 2004 to 2016. Additional experiences, chiefly in the physics domain, were added for a total of twenty-one tools, inclusive of four items in the specific area of epijournals – plus four supplementary resources which have been simply mentioned or anyway much more synthetically described due to their specific features –, thus casting some light onto an unexpected richness and consonance of endeavours. These experiences rest on the contents of the pioneering database ArXiv, which adds to its universally recognized merits that of setting the grounds for web 2.0 resources, and research behaviours, to be put in place. These resources were surveyed substantially through the method of empirical evidence, partly routed by the web resources examined and by some of the literature, and are accounted for in a time sequence for their essential features. Most of the experiences retrieved are UK- and US-based, but other countries have been involved, such as Italy, the Netherlands and China. Final remarks are sketched. The results integrate the previous studies according to which the web 2.0 is presently of limited use for scholarly communication within the astrophysical community. Collaterally, some aspects of ArXiv's recent pathway towards partial inclusion of web 2.0 features are touched upon. The centrality of the scholarly literature for web 2.0 interactivity in astrophysics and – more presumably – in some other branches of the physics domain emerges as a plausible hypothesis and as a promising research suggestion. Further investigation is not only needed, but also absolutely hoped for.

In this article, we explore the state of the OA market and the current situation with respect to offsetting deals in the Netherlands. We then offer a case study of the LingOA model for a transition to open access, backed by a consortial funding mechanism: the Open Library of Humanities (OLH). We also suggest how this approach can be extended into new disciplinary spaces (in particular, mathematics and psychology, where there is already some willingness from editors).

This paper's main objective is to present and discuss some results of a research project in progress on issues currently in debate on open scholarly journals dedicated to the publication of research outputs on an open, democratic and transparent basis. It contemplates a brief review of the literature about challenges regarding openness of the current scholarly publication system and political-economic constraints to its democratization, to support the analysis of two case studies on open publication platforms – Research Ideas and Outcomes and Wellcome Open Research – based on information available on their websites. As results, we present an analysis of publication practices and policies in action on these platforms and their policies.

Recently, altmetrics have emerged as alternative means of measuring scholarly impact, aiming at improving and complementing both traditional and web-based metrics. The aim of the present study is to contribute to the altmetrics literature by providing an overview of the coverage of altmetrics sources for the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (AUTh) publications. We used Scopus to collect all research articles stating AUTh as the affiliation of at least one author and published from 2010 to 2016. The altmetric data originated from Altmetric Explorer, a service provided by Altmetric.com. Only 17% of all publications retrieved from Scopus had some kind of mentions, while there was a clear increasing trend over the years. The presence of altmetrics was different from each Altmetric.com attention source. Around 81% of all mentions came from Twitter. Facebook was a distant second, followed by news outlets. All other sources had very low or negligible coverage. The overwhelming majority of tweets had been posted by members of the public, who do not link to scholarly literature. Medical Sciences had by far the highest number of publications with altmetric scores, followed, in a distance by Sciences. However, Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences publications exhibited a significant altmetric activity. More research is needed in order to get a better insight into the altmetric landscape in Greece and develop an understanding about the kind of influence altmetrics measure, and the relationship, if any, between altmetric indicators and scientific impact.

Doing open science is to collaborate with others in a scientific endeavor and to share the outcomes of the scientific process. However, there are many dimensions of openness. Thus when analyzing concrete open science initiatives one finds a full lot of hybrid forms of openness. We identify and discuss different elements of open science and their benefits, under the contention that benefits are related to how openness is achieved. We propose a bi-dimensional framework to characterize openness along research stages, which allows anticipating expected benefits. The first dimension accounts for the characteristics of the collaboration, while the second for aspects of access to shared outputs. We illustrate our framework by discussing four Argentinean open science initiatives.

Data has become more and more ubiquitous in the research context. As a result, a growing number of services are created to analyze, store and share research data. This has induced the Research Data Working Group of the Digital Scientific Library (BSN10) to launch an inventory of French research data management services, funded by the Ministry of Higher Education and Research. The inventory covers all services that are managed by French institutions and infrastructures and dedicated to public research teams from all fields. Sixty services, provided by forty-five structures, have already been identified and analyzed. The paper describes the methodology used to carry out the inventory and analyzes these first results by service type, scope and research field. It also emphasizes the heterogeneous and emergent nature of the inventoried services.

The number of published findings in biomedicine increases continually. At the same time, specifics of the domain's terminology complicates the task of relevant publications retrieval. In the current research, we investigate influence of terms' variability and ambiguity on a paper's likelihood of being retrieved. We obtained statistics that demonstrate significance of the issue and its challenges, followed by presenting the sci.AI platform, which allows precise terms labeling as a resolution.

This paper will address issues concerning the handling of complex data such as research data, multimedia content, e-learning content, and the use of repositories infrastructures. At the University of Vienna, an ecosystem for digital data preservation and research data management has already been established and will be subsequently be enlarged according to future needs and requirements. in the future. This living digital ecosystem is the foundation for research data management and was implemented from the beginning as a central service according to the FAIR principles as stated in the first HLEG-EOSC [1] report. With the help of ten years of professional experience, a model for digital data preservation was established to address the complexity of heterogeneous data. This was necessary because of different use cases assigned to the interdisciplinary data management team based at the Computer Centre and the Library. The source for the use cases are research projects, their different approach to research and their multifaceted requirements regarding the efficient re-use of data. The usage of this model might be considered as the foundation on which an ecosystem for digital data preservation can be built.

In this work we present findings on non-patent literature use, and specifically scientific publications such as academic articles. We interview patent examiners and observe their prior art searching in order to provide insights into the perceived usage of non-patent literature and produce high level requirements for advancing non-patent literature search tools.

Finland has set numeric goals for the development of open access. However, at the moment, no system is available by which this development could be monitored. Poor quality in the metadata records in universities' research information databases prevents metadata-based analysis of open access publishing progress. This paper shows how the quality problems of Finnish publication data can be resolved through centralizing the services and processes of metadata creation and by improving the interoperability of systems involved in the processes. As a result, this study describes an environment where reliable measurement of open access is possible and presents suggested actions for improving the Finnish publication data collection.

Institutional repositories have played a major role in universities worldwide during the last decade. Such systems are developed with the aim to collect and disseminate the research activities of universities. They provide access to and showcase research outputs, and therefore they have become an essential infrastructure for universities. A repository provides the means to properly preserve research outputs and can also be used for research monitoring and assessment. In this case study, we concentrate on the transformation of Ktisis, the institutional repository of the Cyprus University of Technology, into a Current Research Information System (CRIS). A CRIS system records, processes, and presents metrics and figures related with research activity throughout its life cycle. Particular emphasis is given to the results of research activities (publications, patents, research data) and their connection with the environment within which they were created (researchers, organizations, funded programs and projects, research infrastructures, services). In this case study we will describe the procedures followed in order to transform Ktisis into a CRIS system together with the implementation of the integration of ORCID identifiers within the system. Particular attention will be paid to the challenges we came across throughout the process and how we overcame these difficulties and problems. Ktisis is the institutional repository developed and maintained by the Library and Information Services at the Cyprus University of Technology. Ktisis was created in 2008 using the open source software DSpace after the University's Interim Governing Board made the decision that all the research products of academic members must be deposited in the Library. In subsequent years, the mandatory deposit of undergraduate, MSc and PhD theses was also imposed. In early 2015 it was decided that the Cyprus University of Technology (CUT) must become a member of ORCID and the Library undertook the project to integrate ORCID in its systems. At the same time the Library decided that the best way to move forward was to transform Ktisis into a CRIS system using DSpace-CRIS, an extension to DSpace, in order to integrate ORCID with the repository and to take advantage of all the functionalities provided by a CRIS system.

In the World Wide Web, a very large number of resources are made available through digital libraries. The existence of many individual digital libraries, maintained by different organizations, brings challenges to the discoverability and usage of these resources by potential users. A widely-used approach is metadata aggregation, where a central organization takes the role of facilitating the discoverability and use of the resources, by collecting their associated metadata. The central organization has the possibility to further promote the usage of the resources by means that cannot be efficiently undertaken by each digital library in isolation. This paper focuses in the domain of cultural heritage, where OAI-PMH has been the embraced solution, since discovery of resources was only feasible if based on metadata instead of full-text. However, the technological landscape has changed. Nowadays, with the technological improvements accomplished by network communications, computational capacity, and Internet search engines, the motivation for adopting OAI-PMH is not as clear as it used to be. In this paper, we present the results of our initial analysis of available potential technologies, in particular, the following: IIIF (International Image Interoperability Framework); Webmention; Linked Data Notifications; Sitemaps; ResourceSync; Open Publication Distribution System (OPDS); and the Linked Data Platform.

This paper is based on research conducted as an initiative under the Open and Collaborative Science in Development Network (OCSDNet) to explore new innovative mechanisms that can enhance collaborative disaster recovery planning, knowledge management, and learning in the Caribbean. The need for enhanced knowledge management to mitigate disaster risk through the sharing of information and knowledge is a strategic imperative of the Caribbean Disaster Management community. We employ a preliminary conceptual application of the Knowledge Commons/IAD Framework to illustrate how this kind of institutional analytic process can illuminate and inform strategy, governance and desirable collective action, as well as the merits of alternative enabling technologies. The study contributes to arguments challenging the neutrality of infrastructure for collective action. It highlights the importance, and perhaps imperative, of an institutional approach to the design and implementation of socio-technical systems.

Openness has become an explicit subject across science policy and scholarly practice, where it is often vindicated in a rhetoric of optimism. In political discourse, as much as in the scholarly literature, open access to research data and publications is expected to enable what policy has typically failed to achieve by other means: that is, to overcome material, class, and political barriers that stand in the way of knowledge circulation. However, whether openness in science is a good thing or not also seems to depend on what is being opened, to what extent and for whom. In this paper I draw on different critical areas of Latin American science, technology and society studies (LASTS) to suggest that the current dominant views around open science can be limiting, as much as they could be enabling, more inclusive dynamics of access to and uses of scientific knowledge, especially in the peripheral (or non-hegemonic) contexts of science. These limiting views around openness, I argue, are linked with restrictive conceptions about science and its products: scientific activity is understood, by this token, as an invariably universal enterprise. In consequence, science outputs are conceived as self-contained knowledge products, and the processes and practices that account for their production and use are only partly taken into consideration. The aim is hence to elaborate on different forms of participation and exclusion to the processes of knowledge production which could help us understand how different stakeholders become engaged or excluded in the production of knowledge. To do so, I take the case of genomic research and drug development for neglected diseases as my empirical background. The argument draws on two concepts from LASTS. The first one is cognitive exploitation, according to which scientific outputs are used in for-profit contexts by third-parties, but without compensating the original producers. In this way, it is not only producers, users and appropriators of knowledge who become key in the dynamics of knowledge circulation, but also those acting as intermediaries. The other concept is integrated subordination, which refers, on the one hand, to the dynamics by which peripheral regions collaborate with elite research networks, and the difficulties that stand in the way of industrializing scientific knowledge, on the other. These difficulties spawn from the lack of capacities, but also from adherence to international research agendas, which are not necessarily connected with those required to attend to social needs in peripheral contexts. By putting into question the nature and the limits of openness, and by re-examining the types of knowledge at stake (beyond research data and publications), the actors, and their involvement, I suggest other ways in which open scientific knowledge could become effectively used.

Traditionally, universities in the North as well as in the Global South concentrated their activities on two main missions: Teaching and Research. A “third mission” of universities called “service to the community”, defined as its social responsibility to contribute to development, is now promoted to researchers [1] [2] [3]. Several studies have shown that scientific and local knowledge play an important role in the process of sustainable development by creating an operational interface between researchers, students and non-profit organizations [4] [5] [6]. In order to fully accomplish this mission for the benefit of local communities, researchers are getting involved in Science shops, which were established in the Netherlands in the 1970's. Glen Millot [15] speaks of “third sectors” in reference to the role Science Shop plays. Indeed, Science shops are dynamic mediators of cooperation between communities, NGOs, citizens and researchers. Science Shos teams receive demands from civil society or organizations and helps translate them into research programs or scientific issues that students and researchers treat and make the results available to communities. This presentation will firstly focus on a definition of some useful concepts. Then, the second part will deal with the origin of Science Shops and their evolution before analyzing the process of setting up the UCAD Science Shop “Xam-xamu niep ngir niep” (Knowledge of all for all).